James McCullough from the mysterious “Council” gives a special assignment to CIA agent Aaron Delgado to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and pin the blame on Muslim Terrorists. Delgado and fellow agents, Phillip Singer and Chase Jordan, work with a group of unsuspecting engineers to develop unmanned jets that will hit their assigned targets.

The Army and the FBI begin to uncover the plot, forcing Delgado to intervene. The CIA agents also have to deal with an increasingly suspicious George Poole, the lead engineer working on the drones, who becomes skeptical on how the remote controlled planes will be used. A battle between good and evil ensues as the plot to attack America becomes a hard-hitting reality.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

looks good, I wonder if it will be say 95% accurate to what really happened, based on using the best theories, research and guesswork.

It certainly seems like the WTC towers were effectively half empty most of the time, especially when you look at the FOI tenancy records since it was built, as I have. Then the corporations who moved in to some of the floors were probably involved, including AON and the BoA, and we don't know if those floors were even staffed at all. No views from the tiny windows and 70s architecture, and a billion dollars worth of asbestos rectification work required for those loss-making white elephants nobody wanted in the first place, sucking business out of downtown Manhattan with subsidised rents. Govt inside a govt with elite connections everywhere to pull off some big agendas 'in the national interest' – all paid for out of the 'victims compensation fund' for 1,500 non-existent 'victims' and the massive insurance payout on the buildings from patsy European re-insurers.

Also, if you haven't yet, check out this highly credible and clinching documentary by AE911Truth.org called "9/11 Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out" in which 50+ highly credible and credentialed experts (architects, engineers, scientists, etc.) explain why the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC and Building 7 cannot be true and why a new real independent investigation is needed. The hard evidence, science, logic and common sense they present is irrefutable. This film is a total clincher that will convince any reasonable person that the 9/11 Truth case is completely valid.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

I ordered the DVD and just saw the movie. Here is my review posted on the IMDB message board for the film:

* Warning: May contain a few spoilers. *

I ordered the DVD and just saw it.

Not bad. Very interesting. But at 90 minutes, it felt rushed. A lot more things could have been expanded upon and developed more.

I'm also disappointed that they weren't able to use real stock footage from the news broadcasts from 9/11, probably due to legal reasons.

I don't understand some of the plot though. So those black drone planes replaced the real flights? What happened to the real flights then? We saw what happened to the passengers of one flight. But what about the other three?

* Warning: Spoilers *

It also seems far fetched that they would put all those involved in the remote controlled planes project onto one plane without everyone getting suspicious. Immediately, they would have deduced that they were going to be disposed of. Yet only one guy found it odd, but did nothing.

I didn't understand the plot behind Flight 93 though. Why were they going to crash it into that hole? What would be the point of that? I thought it was supposed to hit Building 7? They should have went with that plot instead.

Also, it was not explained why they wanted to take down Building 7. Did I miss it?

Why did the guy who detonated the WTC want to detonate early without receiving the order? That wasn't explained. Was he supposed to wait for the building to be evacuated first?

I'm also not clear which character played George W. Bush and which played Larry Silverstein. Their names weren't used so it wasn't clear who was playing them.

The film also has some minor bugs. The words describing the time and location at the bottom were too small, smaller than they are supposed to be in movies. The ending credits were also too small too. And the DVD menu was weird. You could barely see the yellow selector line, it was broken and uneven and vanished under certain chapters.

It was obvious that this was made on a low and limited budget with many restrictions. I wish someone like Oliver Stone would make this. It should be at least 2 hours too, so more details could be developed and explained.

But it's a good film nonetheless, even though it felt rushed. The directors and actors must have had a lot of guts to be willing to do a film like this regardless of the consequences.

It's a pity the mainstream media and movie critics don't want to acknowledge the existence of this film.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

I haven't seen the movie, but I've become something of a 'no planer' theorist of late to try to make sense of the evidence and most achievable MO. A study of the videos and footage around the WTC towers suggests a lot of faked imagery, leaving one to wonder what actually collided with the towers. may not have been commercial flights, which strikes 2 planes off the list. it appears most likely a jetliner just did a flyover of the pentagon and kept going, and the actual damage was either a Tomahawk missile or internal explosives. that's 3 out. and the plane that 'crashed' at shanksville appeared to be pretty well empty of people and luggage -- and plane parts and wreckage. some theorists suggest it went somewhere else, a description of a plane matching a warthog A10 was witnessed in the area, it's possible they just fired some ordnance into the ground to (poorly) simulate a crash site. or maybe fired another Tomahawk missile? Or a Maverick missile from the A10. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 125x240179)

all we have is a bunch of most likely faked recordings of 'cell phone conversations' that were technically impossible to have been made. no taxiing or take off times declared for two of the flights on the FAA database. flights didn't even exist until some 2-3 weeks beforehand. the tailplanes of a couple have been seen in service since 9/11. they took 4 years to be marked as 'cancelled' on the FAA reg database (should say 'destroyed' by normal protocol).

the passenger flight lists are suspicious -- contain far too many Pentagon-connected names. some of my early theories were that the planes were successively landed in ohio and people disembarked, to be told they were going to be transferred to another plane. (transponders were turned off at this time in radar dead zones to disguise the landings at ohio.) all the planes were only about a quarter full. I guessed that this was deliberate, and that the passengers of 3 flights were finally transferred to Flight 93 so that it was pretty well full, with the intention of crashing it into WTC7 and finishing the circle with the right number of victims. now I'm not so sure. the movie I assume suggests they were all killed at the NASA depot by some means. it's possible many or nearly all of the names were faked, although corroboration would suggest you cannot create identities of people working at say Boeing in a particular place without someone at the place saying they'd never heard of them. there's something odd about bringing barbara olson into it -- either she was killed or left the country.

hitting WTC7 was supposedly the grand finale, the ultimate insult to the american people, if indeed it was going to be a target (why mine it up with explosives otherwise? unless they were always going to claim incidental damage brought it down.) in retrospect, it appears almost cheesy to have set that one up -- how could these little saudi arabian terrorists categorically know that hitting the large towers would bring them down, and that they would then swoop in and hit the now-exposed WTC7 with a final plane? seems implausible.

SydneyPSIder wrote:The CIA visiting at night? The knout on the nape of the neck? Career oblivion? who knows

If none of that happens - will you draw any conclusions from that?

Not really. I'm never sure quite why the CIA or other spooks choose to 'accident' certain people at certain times, and not others. There have been a lot of suspicious deaths around JFK, and a few around 9/11, such as Barry Jennings. Sometimes they just warn people off, such as the PI who refused to go on with the investigation around Barry Jennings.

Why are you so intrigued about how the CIA or other intelligence operatives choose to operate?

SydneyPSIder wrote:I haven't seen the movie, but I've become something of a 'no planer' theorist of late to try to make sense of the evidence and most achievable MO. A study of the videos and footage around the WTC towers suggests a lot of faked imagery, leaving one to wonder what actually collided with the towers. may not have been commercial flights, which strikes 2 planes off the list. it appears most likely a jetliner just did a flyover of the pentagon and kept going, and the actual damage was either a Tomahawk missile or internal explosives. that's 3 out. and the plane that 'crashed' at shanksville appeared to be pretty well empty of people and luggage -- and plane parts and wreckage. some theorists suggest it went somewhere else, a description of a plane matching a warthog A10 was witnessed in the area, it's possible they just fired some ordnance into the ground to (poorly) simulate a crash site. or maybe fired another Tomahawk missile? Or a Maverick missile from the A10. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 125x240179)

all we have is a bunch of most likely faked recordings of 'cell phone conversations' that were technically impossible to have been made. no taxiing or take off times declared for two of the flights on the FAA database. flights didn't even exist until some 2-3 weeks beforehand. the tailplanes of a couple have been seen in service since 9/11. they took 4 years to be marked as 'cancelled' on the FAA reg database (should say 'destroyed' by normal protocol).

the passenger flight lists are suspicious -- contain far too many Pentagon-connected names. some of my early theories were that the planes were successively landed in ohio and people disembarked, to be told they were going to be transferred to another plane. (transponders were turned off at this time in radar dead zones to disguise the landings at ohio.) all the planes were only about a quarter full. I guessed that this was deliberate, and that the passengers of 3 flights were finally transferred to Flight 93 so that it was pretty well full, with the intention of crashing it into WTC7 and finishing the circle with the right number of victims. now I'm not so sure. the movie I assume suggests they were all killed at the NASA depot by some means. it's possible many or nearly all of the names were faked, although corroboration would suggest you cannot create identities of people working at say Boeing in a particular place without someone at the place saying they'd never heard of them. there's something odd about bringing barbara olson into it -- either she was killed or left the country.

hitting WTC7 was supposedly the grand finale, the ultimate insult to the american people, if indeed it was going to be a target (why mine it up with explosives otherwise? unless they were always going to claim incidental damage brought it down.) in retrospect, it appears almost cheesy to have set that one up -- how could these little saudi arabian terrorists categorically know that hitting the large towers would bring them down, and that they would then swoop in and hit the now-exposed WTC7 with a final plane? seems implausible.

You are absolutely incredible. It's also amazing to the lengths no planers go to find boogeymen.

really? wrote:You are absolutely incredible. It's also amazing to the lengths no planers go to find boogeymen.

No, not boogeymen. Just some funky inconsistencies and information that doesn't seem to make sense. It's the funky stuff that spawns people to question even the logical parts of what is reported.

In some cases, skeptics will evaluate the validity of information based on the credibility of the source. Since there is an established history of "Official" reports released to the general public with key information deleted for security reasons etc., we tend to question (well, at least I know that I tend to question) what aren't we being told. If we know or accept that this is SOP, then it can taint the quality or accuracy of any official information.

really? wrote:You are absolutely incredible. It's also amazing to the lengths no planers go to find boogeymen.

just going on the hard available evidence, matey, what are you going on?

in fact, if you check my post on excessive Defence spending, you'll see it's actually Pentagon types who like to conjure up bogeymen to scare the American people with to keep their jobs and the exorbitantly expensive military-industrial complex going.

really? wrote:You are absolutely incredible. It's also amazing to the lengths no planers go to find boogeymen.

just going on the hard available evidence, matey, what are you going on?

in fact, if you check my post on excessive Defence spending, you'll see it's actually Pentagon types who like to conjure up bogeymen to scare the American people with to keep their jobs and the exorbitantly expensive military-industrial complex going.

This changes nothing. You are still incredible along with all the other no planers.